Quantcast
Channel: Latest Discussions - COMSOL Forums
Viewing all 26527 articles
Browse latest View live

help internal parser error

$
0
0
Hi,
it appears an error that says "internal parser error" when I write " 0.01[Pa·s] " in Global Definitions->Parameters.
It has something to do with the viscosity units.
Could anyone help me?
Thanks in advance,
Belén

moving projectile-railgun

$
0
0

Hi

The following link

www.comsol.com/stories/cote_railgun/full/

describes a model with a moving domain.

Does anyone have the paper or model file or maybe knows

some detail, which modules were used, in particular how motion was achieved

while maintaining electrical contact.

thanks

David

Eigenvalue Calculations In RF Module With Perfectly Matched Layers: Radiation Q factors

$
0
0
Hi everyone,

I have one part general info that maybe others will find helpful, and one part question. Here goes:


I've been trying to compute the eigenvalues of dielectric GaAs disk structures (embedded in air or some other dielectric cladding) in the RF module.

In particular, I wanted to find the Q-factor (due to radiation alone) of whispering gallery modes in these structures. The type of mode isn't important, just that I wanted Q-factor for a dielectric structure that can radiate, so the Q factor is not infinity even though all materials are lossless.

For some reasons specific to my problem, I can't do this in the 2D axi-symmetry approach as you'll find in some of the comsol related papers on whispering gallery modes in aix-symmetry.

I'm forced to do 3D. Anyway, I had assumed that simply using perfectly matched layers (PMLs) of one wavelength thickness would do the trick and allow any radiation associated with the eigenmode to be absorbed w/o reflection and just die in the PMLs.

I've had lots of success with comsol default PMLs in say, steady state (frequency domain, stationary) analysis. So I was really puzzled why the choice of the size of my cladding layer before PMLs affected DRAMATICALLY the Q factor reported by comsol. The resonant frequency (and consequently, wavelength) were relatively unaffected by how big a domain I drew around my (nm to micron sized) disk.

Turns out, comsol drops a scaling factor in the "coordinate stretching in the complex plane" that is equal to the wavelength. This means (and I worked through the math here, given comsol's definition of the PML stretching) that effectively my physically 1 wavelength (~1200 nm) long PML "looks" like it's 1 METER long after PML stretching. This is no good--especially when you only have 5 elements in that 1 wavelength long PML. It means that it is TERRIBLY undermeshed. This normally just leads to "Singular Matrix" for most cases, but in the off chance you DO get a solution, the Q factor is nonsense, but yet the wavelength is in the ballpark.

The fix:

Set the scaling factor, F, as it appears in the PML subnode equal to 1 wavelength (of the mode you're interested in, so you kinda have to take a guess, just like you do at where to search for eigenmodes, you can tune later once comsol reports a wavelength from a first run...remember, the wavelengths [frequencies] I think are trustworthy regardless of PML choice).

This worked like a charm for me, and I believe is a general approach for getting Comsol to report Quality factors truthfully. I compared my results for a disk that's 2 microns long made out of GaAs (easy to find in literature--it's all over a google search for "whispering gallery modes + comsol"), and got decent agreement with the Q factor they report from axi-symmetry analysis.

Anyway, I hope the above may help others, since I've struggled for a month now before I read the fine print in comsol and found they drop the "lambda" term in their coordinate stretching in eigenvalue calculations so as to avoid nonlinear dependence (b/c wavelength and frequency are connected, the stretching would be eigenvalue dependent otherwise)...

I do have one question, if anyone can help. Comsol reports 1 Q-factor from taking the imaginary part of the eigenvalue and dividing by twice the real part of that same eigenvalue calculation. If it were REALLY REALLY correct,then I should be able to go into post processing mode and do the following:

1. Know Q =(defined)=omega_0*(Time_Avg_Energy_at_resonance)/(Time_avg_power_disssipated_at_resonance)

2. Extract omega_0, the resonant ANGULAR frequency, from the imaginary part of the eigenvalue

3. [3D Volume] Integrate energy density over entire model space (all domains) to get the numerator

4. [3D Volume] Integrate resistive losses (or power dissipation density in V4.2, they're the same) to get the denominator.

I do this and I get the computed quality factor from (1) to be EXACTLY 2 times that which comsol reports.

Anybody have any ideas on where this is coming from. I'm happy knowing ONE of the answers is correct and that only a factor of 2x separates me from truth, but I'd very much appreciate it if someone could tell me what one is the right one. I'm inclined to believe the computed answer from number (1) above, because it agrees better with numbers I find in the literature for my test case...But even comsol's direct answer isn't too far off those values either (well, a factor of 2....but maybe comsol IS right).

Thanks!

--Matt

rf mems switch

$
0
0
can anybody upload a .mph file of rf mems switch ? i am new to Comsol. and ii want to study a movement of mems switch on this s/w.

absorbing boundary condition for heat transfer problem

$
0
0
Hi, can I give a absorbing boundary condition for a transient heat transfer problem. This is to avoid the heat wave reflecting at the boundary and contributing to the temperature rise. Can someone help?

Euler-Euler Model: reached singularity

$
0
0
I am running a Euler-Euler model and get a singularity error about six seconds into a 12 second analysis. It appears that there is a high velocity flair at an inlet when the singularity occurs. I have tried refining the mesh but the error returns. Any suggestions on how to relax convergence or to avoid this convergence issue? I am willing to accept some reduced accuracy in order to achieve convergence.

harmonic perturbation

$
0
0
I have a question about harmonic perturbation

I assigned a 1 A current to a cylinder in mf physics using multi-turn coil and solved it with a 60Hz frequency using frequency domain. If I assign 0.1 A to the harmonic perturbation under this coil, what is this current actually? if this "harmonic perturbation" is a harmonic order, why we can not set the order of harmonic?

if this is not an harmonic order, how can we assign harmonic order {A(60Hz)+B(120Hz)} to a coil in frequency domain study.?

Regards,

PML Scaling factor in COMSOL 4.3

$
0
0
Hi,

I am doing a 3D simulation with COMSOL 4.3 to find the field distribution and the mode of a waveguide where all the cladding, the core and the substrate have different refractive index. I have implemented a PML at the end of my waveguide to avoid any back reflection in to the waveguide and any standing wave patterns which might arise due to this reflection.

But I am still having some reflection from my PML which means it is not optimized. I have tried to manually scale down at the ‘’PML scaling factor’’ option for each of the interface as:

wavelength/nguide/PML_length , wavelength/nsubstrate/PML_length and wavelength/nsubstrate/PML_length

but it didn't help. Can anyone suggest how to properly scale the PML in COMSOL 4.3 for optimized performance? Thank you very much for any help and suggestions.

esrom

COMSOL Failing at Simple DE?

$
0
0
I've encountered a very simple problem with COMSOL's eigenvalue solver and I was wondering if anyone else has had the same problem.

I'm trying to solve the simplest DE imaginable. I'm trying to find eigenmodes for the 1D wave equation.

Governing Equation:
phixx = - lambda*phi

Domain:
x in [0, pi]

Boundary Conditions:
phi(0) = phi(pi) = 0

I'm using the eigenvalue solver in the General Form PDE module.

The solutions to this problem are sine waves. phi = A*sin(sqrt(lambda)*x), where lambda = n^2 for an integer n. COMSOL solves this problem fine.


The problem comes if I try to solve this problem by introducing an auxiliary field, beta.

Governing Equation:
phix = beta
betax = -lambda * phi

Domain:
x in [0,pi]

Boundary Conditions:
phi(0) = phi(pi) = 0

This should be an equivalent problem, but COMSOL is not able to solve it correctly. All of the modes it gives me look like garbage. Frankly, I'm beginning to distrust my previous results in COMSOL because of this issue...

Has anyone encountered anything like this before?

Any help would be appreciated,
-Julian

Confine Modes

$
0
0
HI,

I am doing a structure eigen-mode analysis. How can I only see the longitudinal mode and filter out other modes?


Thank you

What does it mean to have imaginary part for the force (AC/DC module)?

$
0
0
Hi,

I am running a simulation to calculate the force between two conductors carrying AC current. I used MF with simple two circles of copper and surrounding of air. I set current density 200 in z direction and -200 on z direction for the second coil. The magnetic field looks great and as expected. But you can see the force evaluation in the bottom of the picture, it is complex value!

Does it mean it is sinusoidal? Even if, this means that the average force is zero? this is not true because there should be a net repulsive force.

Please help me with this problem, Thank you.

Applying time derivative as a dirchlet boundary condition

$
0
0
Hi,

I need to apply the time derivative of a displacement created in a piezomaterial as the velocity for a fluid boundary.....

Could someone please let me know as to how this can be handled in COMSOL....Eagerly waiting for your reply.....

Thanks in advance!!

Regards,
Rahul Kishor
Nanyang Technological University,Singapor

batch file

$
0
0
Hey.

How to use batch files.
And where is possible to find documentation on this topic.

Thank you.

How to save a solution

$
0
0
Hello , I have a question about how to save a Comsol solution. I did a model in Comsol 4.2 , after 31hs I got a solution , I saved the model but when I opened it again the solution was not there , so I had to run it again and wait another 31 hs !!

1-How can I save the model with the solution ? Like the models in the model library..


2-What are the main features of a computer to run faster the simulations ?

Thanks,

Heat Transfer in a bitumen tanker

$
0
0
I am trying to model a steel tanker filled with molten bitumen. The tanker is insulated and the bitumen is heated by two propane burners ( in form of U) located at the bottom.

For the bitumen I have Non-isothermal Flow-Laminar ,

For the gaseous phase above the bitumen: Non-isothermal Flow-Laminar (not sure).

For the propane: Pipe Flow module (I am not sure if I can use it for a gas)

Also I have Heat transfer in solids for all solid structure with convection to the exterior.

I need to simulate the propane because my goal is to analyze the different configurations of heaters and their impact in the temperature profiles , specifically , the risk of reaching ignition conditions at the interface bitumen/gaseous phase.

Are the modules ok for this simulation ? I always have some kind of error message.

Thanks,



Initially Stressed Bimorph Beam - Electrostatic Actuation

$
0
0
Dear All,

I am attempting to model a bimorph which naturally deflects upwards due to stress in the lower layer of the beam. So far, this part has been successful. The top of the bimorph is silicon, and the bottom, stressed layer, is silicon dioxide. The idea is to apply a voltage to the top silicon, and ground an electrode underneath the deflected beam. The voltage differential creates an electrostatic force which pulls the beam down towards the electrode.
So far I've seen decent results building this in 4.1 without the MEMS module. I've used structural mechanics, ALE mesh, and electrostatics as so many other threads and discussions have suggested. The problem with my model is two fold:

1) in the deflection state, the Silicon and Oxide are supposed to be permanently attached to each other, but the plots in my results section clearly show that the Silicon layer is deflecting independently from the oxide layer. How can I express a condition that ensures the boundary that the two materials share moves in unison?

2) the bottom electrode is a slab of silicon. I've added it to the structural mechanics node, so it has solid material properties. As I ramp the voltage up, the beam does begin to deflect down towards the electrode, which is exactly what I want. However, at a certain point, it should hit the solid silicon electrode and lie flat. However, the beam continues to deflect downwards through the solid silicon electrode. This is even more strange to me, since I set the ground plane to be the top surface of the Silicon. How can a) the beam deflect through the solid, and b) the electrostatic attraction work if the beam has deflected past the ground level?

I've attached the model for anyone who is interested in helping!

Thank you!

Jason

Solving Time dependent problem with stationary solver at the same time.

$
0
0
Hi,

I am trying to simulate a brushless DC motor. I want to make comsol to solve the problem in the form of time dependent. However, during each time step, comsol should solve and obtain a stationary solution. This mean that the main solver is time dependent and stationary solver in each time step. How can I do that?
File is attached.

Thank you.

Calling all electrochemical enthusiasts - March courses on Electrodeposition and Corrosion

$
0
0
Join us this March for our special courses focused solely on electrochemical applications. First, we will be offering our popular Electrodeposition course where we will cover electrode kinetics, the influence of mass transport and moving boundaries in electrodeposition.

And for all those interested in Corrosion, we will explore galvanic corrosion modeling, cathodic protection, and the effects of mass transport in corrosion. This is learning experience you don't want to miss out on!

March 7th - Electrodeposition: www.comsol.com/events/e/22433/
March 8th - Corrosion: www.comsol.com/events/c/22435/

Hope to see you there!

Best,

Kristen O'Connor
Marketing Assistant
COMSOL, Inc.
kristeno@comsol.com

the electric potential dependent on temperature

$
0
0
hello,
please help me

i am trying to make a model of an electrode in a cylinder of biological tissue, i want to make the electric potential on the electrode dependent on the temperature of the tissue, where if the temperature of the tissue become 90 deg C for example the electric potential on the electrode become zero.

i don't know how can i make that.

basant

Placing a finite element model into an electrical circuit in COMSOL 4.1

$
0
0
Hello,

I have recently made the switch from COMSOL 3.5a to COMSOL 4.1, and I am currently unable to do things that I used to be able to do very easily, namely placing my 3-D model (drawn and defined in COMSOL) into an electrical circuit simulation. I easily achieved this in COMSOL 3.5a using the “Conductive Media DC (emdc)” physics module which includes the SPICE Circuit Editor. In the circuit editor, I defined my circuit with the following code:

V1 0 1 9
R1 1 2 1000
C1 2 0 0.00000000003
X1 2 0 resistor
.SUBCKT resistor a b COMSOL: *
.ENDS

This corresponds to a voltage source (9V) across nodes 0 and 1, a 1k resistor between nodes 1 and 2, and the parallel connection of a 30 pF capacitor and my 3-D silicon nanowire model (X1) across nodes 2 and 0. Nodes 2 and 0 correspond with circuit terminals a and b, respectively, which are defined in the Boundary Settings of Conductive Media DC (emdc). This was very easy and convenient to set up.

I have been trying to do this same thing with COMSOL 4.1, trying to learn this from one of the models in the AC/DC Module Model Gallery on the website called “Inductor in an Amplifier Circuit”:
www.comsol.com/showroom/documentation/model/990/

This tutorial could not teach me how to place a 3-D model into the Electric Circuit (cir) module; the explanation in given in the PDF document is quite unclear to me. Their SPICE Netlist appears as follows:

* BJT Amplifier circuit
.OPTIONS TNOM=27
.TEMP 27
Vin 1 0 sin(0 1 10kHz)
Vcc 4 0 15
Rg 1 2 100
Cin 2 3 10u
R1 4 3 47k
R2 3 0 10k
X1 4 5 inductor
RE 7 0 1k
Cout 5 6 10u
Rl 6 0 10k
Q1 5 3 7 BJT
.MODEL BJT NPN(Is=15f Ise=15f Isc=0 Bf=260 Br=6.1
+ Ikf=.3 Xtb=1.5 Ne=1.3 Nc=2 Rc=1 Rb=10 Eg=1.11
+ Cjc=7.5p Mjc=.35 Vjc=.75 Fc=.5 Cje=20p Mje=0.4 Vje=0.75
+ Vaf=75 Xtf=3 Xti=3)
.SUBCKT inductor V_coil I_coil COMSOL: *
.ENDS
.END

First off, I don’t see any way to create/edit the SPICE netlist in this version of COMSOL, the only option is to import and it is asking for a file with a .cir extension. Can I write the SPICE netlist in a .txt document and import that? Or do I make a .txt file and then change file type to .cir and then import that?

Second, why are there two lines “.ENDS” and “.END” here and in version 3.5a I used only one line “.ENDS”? Is this because of the BJT model? If I only have basic parts and one 3-D model (V1, R1, C1, X1) do I use both lines .ENDS and .END? Or just .ENDS?

Third, the line of code which defines X1 as the 3-D model now has variable names "V_coil" and "I_coil" instead of terminal names "a" and "b". The PDF document states:

“The variable V_coil must give the voltage over the device, defined in the global scope. I_coil must be a global variable used in the model as a current through the device.”

However, there are not even any global variables defined in the simulation file provided, there are just global parameters, none of which are V_coil or I_coil. I could not find one instance of the text “V_coil” or “I_coil” anywhere in this simulation file. Also they say V_coil is defined in the global scope. What is the global scope? How can I view the global scope? They don’t mean the Global Definitions tab do they? Because there are no variables defined in this file’s Global Definitions.

Fourth, I cannot tell from the boundary conditions which boundaries are corresponding to the terminals of the device which will be connected to nodes in the circuit. It is not clear which edges/surfaces are corresponding to the two terminals of the device. For example, I have a 3-D rectangular prism and want to make two opposite faces be the two terminals of the resistor. What kind of boundary conditions do I use for these faces with the physics module “Joule heating”? Also, how would I define variable V_wire in the “global scope” and I_wire as a global variable for this simple resistor model?

Fifth, it seems that their 3-D model appears as a component “External I Vs. U1” in the Electrical Circuit (cir) section of the model builder, as its node names are 4 and 5. Is it possible to define a circuit including a 3-D model using just the model builder (i.e. no SPICE netlist) since all components seem to be available in the Electric Circuit (cir) model builder?


I used to implement my 3-D models in the SPICE circuit so easily in COMSOL 3.5a, but to do the same exact thing in COMSOL 4.1 has been extremely difficult for me and I cannot figure it out even after reading the tutorial and looking at the example simulation file. I would very much appreciate some help.

Thank you,
Adam
Viewing all 26527 articles
Browse latest View live